Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add packer itself to bootstrapping in README.md #814

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

kad-tijhuo
Copy link

When you copy/paste the bootstrapping code from the README packer will install but try to remove itself again right away. No matter if you answer yes or no to the question you get a 'display_win' error.

When you copy/paste the bootstrapping code from the README packer will install but try to remove itself again right away. No matter if you answer yes or no to the question you get a 'display_win' error.
@wbthomason
Copy link
Owner

Are you referring to #750? The bootstrap example should work as is, but it seems there may have been a regression in Neovim core since v0.6.1.

@kad-tijhuo
Copy link
Author

I'm referring to #742. I got the same question, asking if it is ok to remove the packer directory, and then throws the display_win error. Like mentioned in the issue, when adding use { "wbthomason/packer.nvim" } to the bootstrap code the problem disappears. I am using v0.6.1 on arch and am just switching to a lua based setup. The bootstrap code was the only code in my init.lua.

@craigmac
Copy link
Contributor

Still happens on neovim HEAD 0.8.0-dev-917-gbaaaa1f2b, the README.md should include use { 'wbthomason/packer.nvim' } in order to work without error. I think it's because if you have no packages defined in the startup call, clean tries to remove the pack/packer/start/packer.nvim directory as an 'unused' package, which it isn't, in this case.

jvcarli added a commit to jvcarli/cosmonauta.nvim that referenced this pull request Jan 2, 2023
[packer.nvim](https://github.com/wbthomason/packer.nvim)
has some anti-features and bugs that were a deal breaker for me:

- Bootstrapping is not straightforward
- Snapshots are fundamentally broken, i.e.
if I removed a plugin I tried to restore a snapshot packer would not work.
- Luarocks install doesn't work on macos
- Packer compilation step is annoying and sometimes makes config files out of sync
with the current setup, which makes debugging and plugin development awkward

[lazy.nvim](https://github.com/folke/lazy.nvim) doesn't have a compilation step,
doesn't require [impatient.nvim](https://github.com/lewis6991/impatient.nvim) for speeding up
modules initialization, has a straightforward bootstrap process and in general has a better design than
[packer.nvim](https://github.com/wbthomason/packer.nvim).

SEE: wbthomason/packer.nvim#814
SEE: wbthomason/packer.nvim#1010
SEE: wbthomason/packer.nvim#180
jvcarli added a commit to jvcarli/cosmonauta.nvim that referenced this pull request Jan 2, 2023
[packer.nvim](https://github.com/wbthomason/packer.nvim)
has some anti-features and bugs that were a deal breaker for me:

- Bootstrapping is not straightforward
- Snapshots are fundamentally broken, i.e.
if I removed a plugin I tried to restore a snapshot packer would not work.
- Luarocks install doesn't work on macos
- Packer compilation step is annoying and sometimes makes config files out of sync
with the current setup, which makes debugging and plugin development awkward

[lazy.nvim](https://github.com/folke/lazy.nvim) doesn't have a compilation step,
doesn't require [impatient.nvim](https://github.com/lewis6991/impatient.nvim) for speeding up
modules initialization, has a straightforward bootstrap process and in general has a better design than
[packer.nvim](https://github.com/wbthomason/packer.nvim).

SEE: wbthomason/packer.nvim#814
SEE: wbthomason/packer.nvim#1010
SEE: wbthomason/packer.nvim#180
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants